"Research shows that stereotypes often have an impact on hiring, promotions and other social experiences.

This study provides compelling evidence that there shouldn't be any discrimination against blondes based on their intelligence."

The results come from a national survey of 10,878 white Americans - all African Americans and Hispanics were excluded to eliminate bias.

All were asked about their natural hair colour.

The results showed that blonde-haired women had an average IQ of 103.2, those with brown hair 102.7, those with red and black hair 101.2 and 100.5 respectively.

IQ scores are designed so that the average score is 100.

The figures are so close that they probably mean there is little difference.

Dr Zagorsky said:

"I don't think you can say with certainty that blondes are smarter than others, but you can definitely say they are not any dumber."

Only one factor appeared to explain any IQ advantage that blonde people could have: they had more books at home when they were growing up.

Dr Zagorsky said:

"If blondes have any slight advantage, it may simply be that they were more likely to grow up in homes with more intellectual stimulation."

Whatever the research says, though, stereotypes live long in the collective mind.

Dr Zagorsky writes:

"...humans use a person's looks as a signal for the person's personality or productivity.

For example, blonde women are often stereotyped as dumb or incompetent while redheads are seen as people with fiery tempers.

These stereotypes are reinforced in popular culture with the dumb blonde female being a staple of Hollywood movies such as Renee [Reese] Witherspoon in the Legally Blonde series or even Marilyn Monroe in Gentlemen Prefer Blondes.

You are definitely funny, rocky!! Unfortunately, although I'm fairly smart and naturally blonde, I also own a ditzy quality like Judy Holliday in "Born Yesterday." I'm sure that I sound unbelievably stupid at times.

Anonymous IX I know I'm not the only soul here who loves intelligent, benevolent, yet ditzy blondes. I really love smarter women - but that's likely where SOTTites might differ, in that I've often read that 'typical' males are (somehow, and stupidly, 'turned off' by smarter women) and I've seen my SUPER smart mum deal with it as it was supposedly worse in her generation.

Such foolish prejudices are not me; I've three past heartbreaks - one beat me in chess - I LOVED it.

Presume your ancestors lived for ages and eons and thousands of years:

-A) Where food was there for the picking, and there was no chance (except occasional lightning bolts) of the mere weather killing off your ancestors before you could have been born;

Vs.

B) Your ancestors spent that same time in a colder temperate zone, with real seasons. And if they did not pretend to be like Aesop's ant, (and not his grasshopper)... well they wouldn't have become anyone's parents, eh?

And over millennia, in which environment would natural selection be more critical?

And in which environment would 'looking into the future' be more critical?

And which would be more likely to prefer those who did a better job of thinking about the future?

The results showed that blonde-haired women had an average IQ of 103.2, those with brown hair 102.7, those with red and black hair 101.2 and 100.5 respectively - IQ scores are designed so that the average score is 100.

So if the average is 100, and the average of all the sampled woman is over 100, that means the shortfall needs to be made up by the men?